Skip to main content

Security report for orgsource.com

.orgSource · Non-profit · N/a

Medium risk. 6 critical or high findings in Security headers, SSL/TLS and 1 other check.

Security score

65/100

Risk levelMedium

0–100, higher is better. How it is calculated

The website orgsource.com represents .orgSource, a specialized consultancy focused on associations and non-profits, offering management and technology consulting services with expertise in digital strategy, AI, and organizational transformation. The company positions itself as a trusted partner with over 20 years of experience and a client base exceeding 350 organizations worldwide. Their service portfolio includes strategic planning, digital transformation, leadership development, and staffing, emphasizing tailored solutions and long-term partnerships. Technically, the site is built on WordPress with modern plugins such as Gravity Forms, Yoast SEO, and Google reCAPTCHA, indicating a mature digital infrastructure. The site is well-optimized for SEO and mobile devices, with good content quality and navigation. However, some security best practices like DNSSEC and security headers are missing, and no explicit privacy or terms of service pages were found, which could be improved. The security posture is moderate with HTTPS enabled and form protection via reCAPTCHA, but lacks advanced DNS and HTTP security headers. No signs of malware or phishing were detected. The domain is long-standing and consistent with the business claims, enhancing trustworthiness. Overall, the site is professional and credible but could benefit from enhanced privacy and security disclosures. Strategic recommendations include implementing DNSSEC, adding comprehensive privacy and security policies, deploying security headers, and maintaining regular security audits to strengthen compliance and trust.

Scanned

NIS2 and GDPR posture

GDPR outside view
95/ 100 · Low
Checks completed
7of 7

NIS2 Art. 21(2)

  1. (a) Risk analysis and security policies: Not visible from outside
  2. (b) Incident handling: One indicator
  3. (c) Business continuity, backups and crisis management: Not visible from outside
  4. (d) Supply chain security: Not visible from outside
  5. (e) Secure acquisition, development and maintenance, including vulnerability handling: Partly checked
  6. (f) Assessing the effectiveness of security measures: Not visible from outside
  7. (g) Cyber hygiene and security training: Not visible from outside
  8. (h) Cryptography and encryption: Partly checked
  9. (i) HR security, access control and asset management: One indicator
  10. (j) Multi-factor authentication and secured communications: Not visible from outside

This scan rated NIS2 with an earlier keyword method that is no longer shown; rescan for the per-article view. Risk management, continuity, supply chain, training, MFA, management oversight (Art. 20) and incident reporting (Art. 23) need internal evidence, and Guard cannot tell whether NIS2 applies to this organisation.

GDPR is indicative only, based on publicly visible signals: Articles 7, 12, 13 and 32 of Regulation (EU) 2016/679 and Article 5(3) of the ePrivacy Directive. Not a certification or legal assessment.

Priority findings

6 findings rated critical or high. Fix these first.

  1. Security headers

    Security headers are instructions your web server sends to every visitor’s browser. Missing ones leave visitors more exposed to attacks such as clickjacking and injected scripts.

    • High

      Missing Strict-Transport-Security header

      Forces HTTPS connections

      What to do: Add "Strict-Transport-Security: max-age=31536000; includeSubDomains; preload"

      • CWE-319
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V3.4.1
    • High

      Missing X-Frame-Options header

      Prevents clickjacking attacks

      What to do: Add "X-Frame-Options: DENY" or "X-Frame-Options: SAMEORIGIN"

    • High

      Missing Content-Security-Policy header

      Controls resources the browser is allowed to load

      What to do: Implement a Content-Security-Policy appropriate for your application

      • ASVS V3.4.3
      • OWASP Secure Headers: OWASP Secure Headers Project recommends Content-Security-Policy: default-src 'self'; form-action 'self'; base-uri 'self'; object-src 'none';…

  2. SSL/TLS

    TLS encrypts the connection and proves the site is really yours. Weak or expiring certificates trigger browser warnings and put traffic at risk.

    • High

      Weak Protocols Supported

      Server supports weak protocols: TLSv1.1

      What to do: Disable TLS 1.0, TLS 1.1, and all SSL versions

      • CWE-327
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • ASVS V12.1.1
    • High

      Weak SSL Key Length

      SSL certificate uses 256-bit key, which is considered weak

      What to do: Use at least 2048-bit RSA or 256-bit ECC key

      • CWE-326
      • OWASP A04:2025
      • Mozilla TLS: Mozilla Server Side TLS 6.0 intermediate: rsa_key_size 2048

Need hands-on remediation? Email guard@offseq.com

Keep watching orgsource.com

This scan found 25 issues across 6 checks. Monitoring re-runs those checks daily, emails you when something material changes and records each fix, so you can show progress.

Daily monitoring

Recommended

€25per month

  • TLS certificates and expiry
  • DNS records
  • SPF, DKIM and DMARC
  • Security headers
  • GDPR and NIS2 posture
  • Exposed services
  • Third-party trackers
  • Security score drift

Email alerts on material changes and an exportable JSON history of every change.

Billed monthly to your card. Cancel anytime. See sample alerts.

Full report

€39.90one-time

  • The complete analysis as a PDF you can cite
  • Email delivery with an unlock code
  • Lifetime access to this report

Prices incl. 21% VAT. Secure checkout by Mollie; sold by SEQ SIA, Latvia.

Results by check

Each check with its score, findings and the evidence it collected.

How this score is calculated

The security score runs 0–100, higher is better. It is the plain average of the security checks that completed in this scan, each counted equally. A check that could not run is left out: it counts neither as a pass nor as a fail.

Counted in this score

SSL/TLS
42
Security headers
15
Email security
75
DNS health
65
Network security
100
GDPR outside view
95
Average
65

Not counted

  • NIS2 outside view: Re-weights evidence from the TLS, email, DNS, network and hygiene checks, so counting it would count that evidence twice. Shown on its own.
  • OffSeq Observations: An AI reading of the site, useful context but not reproducible evidence. Shown on its own.

Findings that cap the score at 49

Each of these is serious on its own, so while any is present the site cannot rate better than high risk, however good the other checks are.

  • The certificate is not trusted by browsers
  • The website is not served over HTTPS
  • A database, remote desktop, file-sharing or Telnet service is reachable from the internet
  • The page loads a script from a compromised source
  • The domain registration has expired
  • SPF authorises every server to send mail as the domain

Partial scans

When the site blocks Guard or most checks cannot run, the score covers only the checks that ran (usually DNS and email), is capped at 75 and is shown as partial, without a risk level.

Risk levels

  • Critical0–25
  • High26–49
  • Medium50–75
  • Low76–100

Technical appendix

Business context, site observations and technical notes gathered during the scan, and the standards behind each reference.

Business context

Business profile

The company operates in the non-profit consultancy sector, targeting associations and non-profits seeking digital and organizational transformation. Their competitive advantage lies in deep sector expertise, a comprehensive service suite including AI consulting, and a commitment to implementation and partnership rather than just advisory. Revenue streams likely come from consulting engagements, workshops, and staffing services. The firm leverages a strong online presence and social proof through testimonials and case studies to attract clients. Their partnership with orgcommunity.com suggests ecosystem collaboration. The business model is service-based with a focus on long-term client relationships and measurable impact.

Security posture

The security maturity level is moderate. The site uses HTTPS and Google reCAPTCHA to protect forms, which are positive indicators. However, the absence of DNSSEC and key security headers such as Content-Security-Policy and X-Frame-Options reduces the overall security posture. No incident response or security policy information is publicly available, which may impact readiness and transparency. There is no evidence of vulnerabilities or exposed sensitive data in the HTML content. Compliance with GDPR is partially indicated by the cookie consent mechanism but lacks a visible privacy policy. Overall, the security culture appears cautious but could be enhanced with formal policies and technical controls.

Recommendations

  1. Enable DNSSEC on the domain to improve DNS security and prevent spoofing.
  2. Publish a comprehensive privacy policy and terms of service to improve transparency and compliance.
  3. Implement HTTP security headers such as Content-Security-Policy, X-Frame-Options, X-Content-Type-Options, and Referrer-Policy.
  4. Maintain regular security audits and vulnerability scanning of the website and plugins.
  5. Develop and publish an incident response plan and security policy to enhance trust and preparedness.
Site observations

Automated reading of the public site. Ratings are indicative.

Business

Company
.orgSource
Description
We are a leading management and technology consultancy for associations and non-profits. We are experts in digital strategy, AI and more.
Key services
Strategy, Analytics & Innovation, Core Operations & Technology, Customer Experience & Marketing, Culture & Organizational Performance, Staffing, Artificial Intelligence Consulting
Content quality
excellent
Branding
consistent

Technology

Stack
WordPress, Gravity Forms, Yoast SEO, Google reCAPTCHA v2, Google Tag Manager, FontAwesome, jQuery
Frameworks
PHP (WordPress), Yoast SEO plugin
Platforms
WordPress CMS
Performance
moderate
Mobile
good
Accessibility
good
SEO
good

Security

Observed score
70/100
Good practices seen
  • Use of HTTPS
  • Google reCAPTCHA on contact form
  • ClientTransferProhibited domain status

Analytics and tracking

Services
Google Tag Manager
Tracking level
moderate
Privacy practices
basic

Advertising

Marketing tools
Yoast SEO
Transparency
basic

Site quality

Design
excellent
User experience
excellent
Content relevance
excellent
Navigation
excellent
Professionalism
excellent
Trustworthiness
high

Key observations

  1. Professional consultancy website for associations and non-profits
  2. Comprehensive service offerings including AI and digital transformation
  3. Strong social media presence and testimonials
  4. Use of modern web technologies and SEO best practices
  5. No evidence of privacy or security policy pages
  6. Contact form protected by Google reCAPTCHA
  7. No suspicious or malicious content detected
Technical notes

Notes

The website is built on a WordPress CMS platform using a modern tech stack including Gravity Forms for data collection, Yoast SEO for search optimization, and Google Tag Manager for analytics. The site loads a variety of fonts and icons from trusted CDNs and uses Google reCAPTCHA v2 for bot protection on forms. Performance is moderate with some preloading and preconnect optimizations. The site is mobile responsive and accessible with semantic HTML and ARIA labels. Technical debt appears low, but the lack of DNSSEC and security headers indicates room for modernization in security infrastructure. Hosting details beyond registrar are not explicit, but the domain is stable and well-maintained.
Standards and sources

Reference chips under each finding point to the standard, regulation or specification the finding relates to. They are taken from the official datasets below and mapped conservatively: a finding with no defensible link shows none. NIS2 and GDPR references mark where a finding is relevant evidence, not a compliance verdict. Implementing Regulation (EU) 2024/2690 binds digital infrastructure and digital service providers; for other entities it is the most detailed public reading of the Article 21 measures. WCAG, EN 301 549, European Accessibility Act and Web Accessibility Directive references name the requirement an automated accessibility rule relates to; they are not a conformance verdict.

Retrieved 2026-10-25

Reviews of this site

Share your experience with orgsource.com. Every review is verified by email and published after moderation.

Overall rating
Select a rating
4000 characters remaining

We’ll email you to confirm your review and keep your details private.

Community rating

No published reviews yet. Be the first to review orgsource.com.

Feedback on this report

Rate this report, add an optional comment, and tell us if you want a security specialist to follow up.

Overall report quality
Select a rating
2000 characters remaining

We only use your feedback to improve Guard reports. Contact details are never shared.